Bibliotheca Sacra 138 (551) (July, 1981) 213-29.
Copyright ©
1981 by
Literary
Features
of the Book of Job
Gregory
W. Parsons
Literary
Genre
The consensus that Job is a literary
work of the highest
magnitude does not make the task of classifying it
with regard to
its literary type any easier. Many literary critics
have attempted to
place the Book of Job into one overarching literary
genre or
category. However. this writer views all attempts to fit the book
into one category as failing to do justice to the
complex nature of
its literary fabric.1
Suggestions as to the basic (or
comprehensive) literary genre
of Job normally have fallen into three major
categories: the law-
suit (byri), which is a legal or
judicial genre; the lament genre.
which is frequent in the Psalms; or the controversy
dialogue or
dispute. which is
similar to the wisdom genre of contest litera-
ture in the ancient Near
East.
BASIC
VIEWS
Lawsuit. Because of the occurrence of legal terminology in
Job. many scholars have
argued that the juridical sphere is the
backdrop of the book.2 Richter understands
the Book of Job as a
secular lawsuit by Job against God whereby the
friends serve as
witnesses (who apparently place a counter-suit
against Job).
Chapters
4-14 are viewed as a preliminary attempt at reconcilia-
tion out of court. and chapters 15-31 are seen as formal court
proceedings between Job and the friends. The
resumption of the
213
214
Bibliotheca Sacra--July-September
1981
case against Job by Elihu
and the judgment of God (38:1-42:6)
in the form of a secular counter-lawsuit between
God and Job
result in the withdrawal of the accusation by Job.3
Scholnick
has presented a scholarly argument for viewing
Job
as a "lawsuit drama” whereby the man (Job) takes his oppo-
nent (God) to court. The
issue of the legal guilt or innocence of the
two parties involved is resolved through a lawsuit
in which the
friends are judges and witnesses.4
Lament.
Although Westermann recognized the existence of a
controversy dialogue in Job 4-27, he argued that the
most im-
portant element in the book is
the lament (the personal lament
well known in the Psalms). The lament by Job, which
begins
(chap.
3) and ends (chaps. 29-31) the dialogue proper, complete-
ly encloses the
controversy speeches.5
Gese
suggested that the original "folk book" of Job, now
allegedly extant only in the prose sections--the
prologue, the
epilogue, and in 3: 1 and 38:1--was a
"paradigm of the answered
lament" pattemed after
three Mesopotamian texts in which an
answer of God came to the sufferer.6
However, Gese argued that
the author of Job changed the original intent of
the "paradigm of
the answered lament," whose form he ironically
employs, by
substituting in the poetic sections
a demand for a trial with God
I
instead of the allegedly original plea for mercy.7
Controversy
dialogue. Some scholars have proposed that
Job
is a variant of the philosophical dialogue, namely a con-
troversy dialogue similar to the
disputation or contest literature
in the ancient Near East.8 Although
Crenshaw acknowledges
that Job cannot be squeezed into one narrow genre,
he considers
the controversy dialogue, which is influenced by
its function
within prophetic literature as self-vindication, as
the major liter-
ary type in the book.9
CONCLUSION
Three views which have been proposed
to describe the com-
prehensive literary genre of the
Book of Job have been cited.
However. the realization
that each of the three positions has at
least some validity underlies the fact that none of
them succeeds
in adequately accounting for the diversified
nature of this com-
plex literary work.10
As a matter of fact. the author of the Book of
Job
skillfully interwove at least three major literary genres into
the fabric of his composition. Using the
terminology of Leveque,
the author skillfully played from three different
"keyboards"11 in
Literary Features of the Book
of Job 215
his polyphonic work--wisdom types, a genre from
Psalms, and a
genre from the legal sphere. Consequently it can be
concluded
that the Book of Job is a "mixed genre" in
which its author
expertly blended a variety of literary types in
order to serve the
function of the book.12
Literary
Devices
Two key literary devices which are
employed by the writer of
Job
are the usage of irony and of mythopoeic
language. The
present author will analyze the significant
manner in which
these two major literary devices are utilized to
assist the develop-
ment of the argument and
purpose of the book. Also less impor-
tant literary devices will
be briefly noted.
IRONY13
The Book of Job is truly a study in
irony. Irony is a significant
literary feature which saturates nearly every
portion of the
book.14
It is interesting that dramatic irony
(similar to that used in
Greek
tragedy)15 plays an important role in the
basic format of
Job. The readers and the heavenly court share the
knowledge
presented in the prologue, of which Job and his
friends are not
aware--namely, that Job is innocent of wrongdoing and
is being
tested as part of the cosmic purpose of God.
It is precisely because of the
reader's knowledge of Satan's
statement that God had put a protective hedge (TAk;Wa) about Job
(
bemoans
that God had placed a hedge around him (j`s,y.Ava)16 so that
he could not die. The very protective hedge which
(although
removed to a greater distance by God) prevents
Job's death (cf.
2:6)
and which was intended for good is conceived of as a restric-
tive hedge intended for
evil.17 Job consciously
speaks ironically
about this "hedge" or security guard (rmAw;mi) in
drips with irony as he asks God the himself was so
dangerous as
the sea monster that he must be put under
twenty-four-hour
surveillance (vv. 17-20). In
guard being restrictive. It is ironic that Job (in
29:2) longed for
the bygone days when Yahweh's guard was a blessing
rather than
a restrictive hindrance.18 It is this
background which enables the
reader to understand the full impact of the irony of
the Lord's
words in 38:8 when He asks Job who hedged in the sea
with
216
Bibliotheca Sacra--July-September
1981
doors (cf.
employed in
The "comforting" friends
make use of irony in a subtle
attempt to prove that Job is wicked. Their words
are aimed at the
wicked man with whom they implicitly identify Job by
means of
verbal irony, whereby they twist Job's words in an
attempt to
incriminate him.19 For example, Eliphaz's
statements in 4:7-11
are an attempt to equate Job with the wicked man
whose lot is
trouble (lmAfA--cf. Job's usage of the
same word in 3:10, 20 to
describe his own condition).20 In
fers to Job's
"roar" (or "moaning," cf.
and groan of a lion (as a symbol of the wicked)21
whose cubs had
been scattered and killed because of God's anger.22
However, a
deeper irony (of which the reader is aware)
overshadows this
passage. Eliphaz's
question, "Were the upright ever destroyed?"
(4:7b)
which implies, according to the retribution dogma, that no
upright person was ever destroyed, is disproved
by the very fact
that Job sits before him on the ash heap (cf. 1: 1,
8; 2:3 where Job
is designated rwAyA).23 Rather than proving Job to be a sinner,
Eliphaz displays his own naive acceptance of an
invalid dogma.
This
not only reinforces Job's innocence in the eyes of the
reader24 but also emphasizes the
absurdity of the retribution
dogma. In similar fashion, Bildad's
possible ironic twisting of
Job's
words (
irony of Bildad's own
statements of 8:6 and 8:20.26
Job
counters the ironic jibes of the friends with his own
ironic remarks. In 12:2 Job retorts sarcastically (or
perhaps
satirically)27 that his friends had
such a monopoly on wisdom
that wisdom would cease when they died. On the other
hand he
ironically states that what they say is common
knowledge to all
men (12:3c). Job says that he himself was not
inferior to them in
knowledge (12:3b and 13:2b). Beneath the irony of
this retort and
his statement "what you know, I also
know" in 13:2a lies the
deeper irony that the equality of their knowledge
(especially with
regard to the assumption of the retribution dogma)
consisted of
virtual ignorance of the Lord's ways.28
Once again Sophoclean
irony reinforces the absurdity of the dogma of divine
retribution.
Here
it also illustrates the futility of a "dialogue" between Job and
the three friends and adumbrates the necessity for
the divine
perspective which comes in the Lord's speeches.29
The usage of irony in the dialogue of
Job, although especially
frequent in the first cycle, occurs almost
throughout the three
Literary Features of the
Book of Job 217
cycles. For example, from the second cycle, Bildad in 18:4 re-
verses the meaning of Job's words of
moved from its place."30 Then Bildad seemingly presents the
.simple orthodox view of the wicked and his fate
(18:5-21).
How-
ever, it is more likely "a masterpiece of irony"
in which Bildad fits
the words Job had already spoken about his own
condition into
the description of the wicked man's fate.31
Job, who apparently
sensed the irony of Bildad's
words, responded in 19:2 by mocking
Bildad's introductory words of his last two
speeches (hnAxA-dfa
"how long?").32
In the third cycle, for example, Eliphaz in
around Job's quotation of the wicked man (
his contention that Job has ironically fallen into
the same path
as wicked men of old (cf. Job's statement in
ly, Eliphaz
counsels Job to put away his wickedness in order that
" his prosperity would be restored (
stating (in
again become efficacious, not only for those who are
innocent,
but even for the guilty (those not innocent).34
This would later
find ironic fulfillment (in a way not envisioned by Eliphaz) when
Job's
prayer for his three friends (including Eliphaz
himself-
42:8-10)
was heard so that they, who were not innocent, were
forgiven.35 Again the reader is
enabled to see the incongruity of
the retribution dogma which Eliphaz
champions.
Job's
words in 27:5-6, where he insists that he would cling to
integrity and maintain his righteousness till
death despite the
allegations of his friends, bears ironic resemblance
to the Lord's
analysis of Job in 2:3. The irony that results
from the use of the
word "integrity" (:'11;{:I) causes the
reader to wonder if the Lord
would still describe Job in the same way after Job's
long and
blasphemous attacks on God.36 The usage of this
literary device
causes the reader to desire (and anticipate) the voice
of God from
the "whirlwind."
There is a noticeable lessening of
irony in chapters 29-31.
Apart
from the mild "self-irony" of 29:237 and 29:18-20, which
contrasts Job's former state with his present
state (chap. 30),
there is almost no irony either about God (cf.
perhaps 31 :3-4) or
toward the friends. There may be an "implied
ironic slap" toward
the friends in 29:25c ("like one who comforts
mourners.38 This
technique of "deironization"
(which allegedly verifies the spur-
ious nature of 29-31)39
is fitting for Job's soliloquy in which he
ignores the friends and turns his hopes toward
God (though
218
Bibliotheca Sacra--July-September
1981
indirectly) in an almost hopeless
"last-ditch" appeal for vindica-
tion. The brunt of the
irony, which is directed toward Job, con-
sists of a dual contrast--between
his former expectations (chap.
29)
and his present state, and between his earlier
flagrant attacks
on God and his present somber appeal for
vindication. These
contrasts are indicative of Job's desperate
situation and prepare
the way for the Lord's speeches.
The speeches of Elihu
are particularly ironic (or even sarcas-
tic) toward the friends for their failure to deal
properly with Job
(32:7,
9-11, 15-16). They also contain a few gently ironic utter-
ances directed toward Job
(cf. 34:33 and 37: 17-20).40 This may
illustrate the somewhat neutral (or perhaps mediatorial) role of Elihu.
The Lord's speeches (particularly the
first) are permeated
with obviously ironic remarks which border on
sarcasm (38:4-5,
18,21). However, they also contain more subtly ironic remarks.
For
example, the Lord's usage of HaykiOm in 40:2 seems to be an
implicit reference to Job's hypothetically HaykiOm (
MYTHOPOEIC
LANGUAGE
The observant reader of the Book of
Job is struck by the
prevalence of mythopoeic
language (the poetic usage of mytholog-
ical allusions) which is
perhaps more prominent in Job than in
any other biblical book.42 Smick has divided the mythological
terminology into four categories: (1) the forces of
nature (the fire,
the sea, etc.); (2) "creatures cosmic or
otherwise"; (3) cosmog-
raphy; and (4) pagan cultic
practices.43 How do these various
mythological allusions fit with an evangelical
view of the origin
and purpose of the Book of Job?44
The only reference to Smick's last category occurs in Job 3:8
where Job calls for enchanters to curse the day (of
his birth) by
arousing Leviathan (presumably to swallow the
sun).45 (Thus the
context supports the retention of MOy in the Masoretic text instead
of its emendation to MyA [sea or the god Yamm!--a chaos force in
Ugaritic as
the counterpart of Leviathan, the sea monster.)
However,
there may indeed be a subtle play on the similar sound
of MOy ("day") and MyA ("sea") and the parallel between Leviathan
and Yamm in Ugaritic mythology.46 Job apparently employed
"the
most vivid and forceful proverbial language"
available to him to
emphasize the depths of his despair and the
intensity of his
anguish.47 Because of Job's clear
statement of his monotheism,
(in 31:26-28), this mythological allusion (as well as others
in the
Literary Features of the
Book of Job 219
book)48 should not be considered as indicative
of Job's belief in
the validity of pagan cultic practices or of the
existence of other deities.49
As a matter of fact, at least two
passages where Job speaks
contain possible polemical overtones. The first
passage (9:5-13),
which includes a host of mythological allusions,50
emphasizes
the sovereignty of the Lord over the sea51
and the uniqueness of
the Lord as the God who alone (ODbal;) made the heavens,
which are
worshiped by pagans (9:8).52 Also 9:7 makes it-clear that it is the
Lord,
not a monster, who is the cause of the eclipse of the sun.53
The
sun (here denoted by sr,H,) is never referred to
as wm,w,54 by the
man Job, which seems to be a conscious but subtle
polemic :
against sun worship.55
The second passage, 26:5-14, also
contains several mytho-
logical allusions.56 However, the
emphasis is clearly on the
sovereignty of God over all the forces of nature.
Verse 7 seems to
contain a merism
whereby the Lord's creation of the north (prob-
ably the "heavens" or "skies")57
and His establishment of the
earth upon nothing58 indicate His total
control of the universe
(see vv. 8-14). Therefore verse 12 which refers to My.Aha (the sea-
with definite article indicating not a proper name)
seems to
be at least an effort at
"demythologizing,"59 if not antimythical
polemicizing.
In the speeches of the friends and of Elihu, besides the few
references to cosmography60 very little mythopoeic language is
used. Eliphaz (in 5:7)
speaks of Jw,r,-yneb; "the sons of Resheph" to
describe the "flames" or
"sparks" which fly upward. Resheph is
well-attested as the Northwest
Semitic god of plague and
pestilence.61 Similarly Bildad in
(tv,mA
rOkB;).62 The mention of "holy ones.” (by Eliphaz in 5:1 and
the ancient Near East in which the lesser divine
beings partici-
pated in an assembly of the
gods who made the decisions (cf. "the
sons of God" in the prologue--1:6; 2:1).63
Now that the basic data concerning mythopoeic language in
Job
have been cited,64 how does one explain the
usage of such
mythological language? The fact that
the mythopoeic language is
much more frequent in the speeches of Job (where
polemical
overtones appear to be present) than in the
friends' speeches
strongly suggests that these allusions are merely
borrowed imag-
ery from the ancient Near Eastem cultural milieu.65 Corrobora-
tion of this may be
indicated by noting the presence of mytho-
220
Bibliotheca Sacra--July-September
1981
poeic language in the Lord's
speeches.66 Mythopoeic allusions are
clearly present in the descriptions of the
restraining of the sea
with bars and doors (38:8-10),67 of
Leviathan breathing fire and
smoke (41:19-21 [11-13]),68 and probably
of the underworld as
having gates (38:17). It is also probable that mythopoeic
language
Ioccurs in the personification of the stars
(38:7--parallelism
with Myhilox<
yneB;),69 of Dawn (rHawa) in 38: 12,70 and of
the constella-
tion Orion (lysiK;) in 38:31.71
Why did God use mythopoeic
language in His speeches to
Job? The present writer has argued elsewhere72
that polemical
overtones exist in the usage of this language.
These polemical
nuances stress the contrast between the uniquely
sovereign Lord
who operates by grace and the ancient Near Eastern
gods who
were bound by the dogma of retribution.
A twofold purpose may be seen in this
subtle polemic against
the gods: (a) to endorse Job's monotheistic
stance73 in the process .
of exposing the inconsistency of Job's action
(unconscious self-
deification) with his theological position: and (b)
to emphasize
that the Lord cannot be manipulated according .to
the dogma of
retribution which bound the gods of the ancient Near
East.74
The
scope of this article permits only one example of polemic
from the Lord's speeches, namely, the subtle
reaffirmation of
Job's
implicit polemic against sun worship.75 The Lord's control
over the sun is shown by His daily command for
sunrise and
sunset, although the word "sun" (wm,w,) is never directly men-
tioned in His speeches.76
This polemic against the sun, however,
does much more than endorse Job's monotheistic
stance. Since
the sun god was almost universally considered to be
the guardian
of justice in the ancient Near East,77
the Lord's control of the sun
(and its limiting of the activities of the wicked--38:13-15)78
demonstrated that the Lord (and the
Lord alone) was the guaran-
tor of justice.79
Explicit in this was the fact that the Lord, not Job,
was responsible for meting out justice (see
38:12-15 and 40:8-14).80
Furthermore
the portrayal of the Lord's sovereignty over
Leviathan,
not only a symbol of chaos and of the wicked and
proud (see 40:12). but also
of Satan himself,81 may involve a
subtle double entendre for the reader which implies
God's victory
over Satan who has been proved wrong.82
OTHER
LITERARY DEVICES
The author of Job also employed
several other literary
devices in the composition of his masterpiece.
Only some of
Literary Features of the
Book of Job 221
these can be noted, and then very briefly, because
they do not
contribute in an obvious way to the overall purpose
of the book.
Several somewhat related literary
devices employed in Job
may be conveniently lumped together under the
general term
"paronomasia.”83 Selected examples of various
types of parono-
masia which occur in Job will
be briefly noted. Some indication of
the existence of alliteration is found in 5:8 where
every word
begins with the letter x except the last word.84
Another common
literary device is assonance. This is used, for
example, in 12:2
where six of the seven Hebrew words contain the
humming
sound ("m") which accentuates Job's mocking
sarcasm.85 Rhyme
occurs occasionally as in 10:8-1886 and in
19:3-4, 17-21.
The use of assonance in Job 3:8
borders that of a play on
words (or "sense"--paronomasia) where the
use of MOy
(which is
suggestive of MyA)87 is
heightened by the pun between "yrer;xo ("those
who curse") and rrefo ("those who
arouse"), two virtual
homonyms. Eliphaz's
play on the words "ground" (hmAdAxE) and
"man" (C1~) in conjunction with the repetition of the
word lmAfA
"trouble" (5:6-7) serves as an effective device to aid
his clever
argument that trouble does not spring from the
ground but from
man.88
Job
with the use of byeOx "enemy") to
describe his relationship to
God.89
This pun is similar to the subtle device of double
entendre
or what Gordis
designates talhin,
after the Arabic rhetoricians)
which sometimes occurs. The author wished to bring
both
meanings of a word (especially when homonyms existed)
to the
consciousness of the reader
simultaneously. For example, in 7:6
the use of hvAq;Ti ("hope") also
brings to mind its homonym which
f means "thread" because of the figure
of the weaver employed in
the verse.90
Conclusion
It has been argued that the Book of
Job does not fit into a
single literary genre; rather, its author skillfully
interwove liter-
ary forms from at least
three major genres (the lawsuit, the
lament, and the controversy dialogue) into the fabric
of the book
lin order to serve its
function.
In a previous article the present
writer suggested that the
purpose of Job (stated in a negative fashion)
was the refutation of
the retribution dogma and its corollary that man's
relationship to
222
Bibliotheca Sacra--July-September
1981
God
is a business contract binding in court.91 In
the present
article this contention is supported by
demonstrating how two
major literary devices (irony and mythopoeic
language) were ex-
pertly employed in the development of this purpose.
Furthermore
several other literary features (such as
assonance, alliteration,
and double entendre, which may be collectively
called paronoma-
sia) were noted. These less
obvious strokes from the poetic
brush, which often do not contribute significantly to
the overall
purpose, may be called the "finishing
touches" to the literary
masterpiece known as the Book of Job.
Notes
1 Even scholars who
attempt to fit Job into one literary genre normally acknowl-
edge the presence of other elements. However. they modify what they view
as the
overall genre in an attempt to include these
other literary elements.
2 However. as noted by
Michael Brennan Dick. "'legal language. itself does not
constitute a distinct literary form. for the juridicial sphere
encompasses a broad
area of human life and does not correspond to a
specific situation (Sitz im
Leben).'
('"The
Legal Metaphor in Job 31; Catholic
Biblical Quarterly 41 (1979): 37).
3 Heinz Richter, Studien zu Hiob: Der Aufbau
des Hiobbuches. dargestellt
an
den Gattungen des Rechtsleben (Berlin: Evangelisches Verlagsanstalt,
(1958)).
Cf.
James L. Crenshaw, "Wisdom," in Old
Testament Form Criticism, ed. John H.
Hayes
(San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 1974), p. 254.
4 Sylvia Huberman Scholnick, "Lawsuit Drama in the Book of Job"
(Ph. D. diss.,
who tries to fit Job into one Gattung;
however, she fails to recognize that the
Lord's
speeches actually serve to discontinue this metaphor. See this writer's
previous article ("The Structure and Purpose
of the Book of Job;” Bibliotheca
Sacra 138 (April-June 1981):
139-57). Scholnick provides a convenient sum-
mary of some other scholars
who have noted the idea that Job represents the
proceedings of a lawsuit ("Lawsuit Drama,"
pp. x-xi; cf. also Crenshaw,
"Wisdom,"
pp. 253-54).
5 Claus Westermann, Der Ausbau des Buches Hiob (
1956), pp. 4-5; and his Handbook to the Old
Testament, trans. and ed. Robert H.
Boyd
(Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1967), pp. 226-33.
6 See James B. Pritchard,
ed. Ancient Near
Eastern Texts Relating to the Old
Testament, 3d ed. (Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 1969), pp. 589-91;
596-601.
Note the actual contrasts between Job and these three texts as pointed
out by the present writer ("A Biblical
Theology of Job 38:1-42:6" (Th.D. diss.,
7
See Hartmut Gese, Lehre und Wirklichkeit
in der alten Weisheit: Studien zu
Spruchen Salomos und dem Buche Hiob (Tubingen:
J.C.B. Mohr, 1958), pp.
63-64, 73. For a helpful summary of Gese's argument, see John Charles Holbert,
"The
Function and significance of the Klage in the book of
Job with Special
Reference
to the incidence of Formal and Verbal Irony” (Ph.D. diss.. Southern
}
states that Gese no longer
holds to this theory ("Jahwes Antwort an Hiob und die